Which darkhorses do you want?

bcaiko

Emperor
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
1,412
Location
Washington, DC
Hey folks -

One of the most fun things about Civ is creating a new world where history plays out differently - giving a chance to civilizations that did not stand the test of time into the modern era for a variety of historical reasons.

I think one of the most fun aspects of Civ is getting the chance to play as a "darkhorse" civilization I've either never heard of or barely know anything about. I think the Zulu and the Songhai are good examples here. Interesting people with fascinating cultures, but folks you don't tend to learn a lot about in your typical world history class.

So - if you had your pick, which lesser known civilization would you choose to be in the next Civilization game/expansion? And why?
 
Although always controversial, I think the CiV crew does a really good job of this. The Shoshone were a real left-field choice, and a fun one with their UA.

As an American, I especially welcome more Native American choices. The Iroquois, as many have pointed out, while weak to the human ironically plays quite strong in the Upper-level AI's hands.

I'm not sure what more dark horses they could pick, unless they pick a City-State in CiV and expand them to a playable Civilization. Like the Samarkand empire, or another East African Civ based in Mogidishu. The Aboriginal people in Australian would be a choice as well.
 
I'd like to see some more unique style civs. For instance, Venice is one of my absolute favorite civs to play as now because they play totally different than any other civ.

I think you have some fun with Religion and the Venice concept. Have like a Vatican City civ that cannot build new cities but could use powerful religious bonuses to gain culture and gold from all civs following that religion. It'd be a great spin on the one city challenge concept.
 
Gonna have to go with the ultimate Dark Horse civ, and say Israel. We have Assyria, Arabia, Persia, Egypt, Turkey, and their Arch-nemesis Babylon, I think they should get their chance too. Jerusalem is already a City-State, but I think it should be a playable Civ so that it can have its rise and fall and rise again like the other Dark Horse Civs. The Huns are my favorite current Dark Horse Civ, and they are literally a Dark Horse.
 
Over in design threads I'm doing a series of (purely creative, no modding experience) civilizations based on some of the names of Barbarian cities in cIV, like the Ainu, and I've learned a lot about several interesting peoples.
 
Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas and Suggestions
 
Gonna have to go with the ultimate Dark Horse civ, and say Israel. We have Assyria, Arabia, Persia, Egypt, Turkey, and their Arch-nemesis Babylon, I think they should get their chance too. Jerusalem is already a City-State, but I think it should be a playable Civ so that it can have its rise and fall and rise again like the other Dark Horse Civs. The Huns are my favorite current Dark Horse Civ, and they are literally a Dark Horse.

I agree about Israel.

I have never played any of the Civ games before Civ IV, but I have never seen Inuits as a playable civ.

I would also like to see Aboriginal Australians, Armenia, Georgia, and eithe Finland or Hungary.
 
Tibet! They had an empire, which rivaled China and still have a civilization!
I'd also like to see the Khmer make a return or perhaps Vietnam, Sri Lanka or Burma (Myanmar).
 
Gonna have to go with the ultimate Dark Horse civ, and say Israel. We have Assyria, Arabia, Persia, Egypt, Turkey, and their Arch-nemesis Babylon, I think they should get their chance too. Jerusalem is already a City-State, but I think it should be a playable Civ so that it can have its rise and fall and rise again like the other Dark Horse Civs. The Huns are my favorite current Dark Horse Civ, and they are literally a Dark Horse.

I am really surprised that in the 25 years of the Civilization franchise, Israel has never been a Civ. It would have been perfect for Civ V to have a Civilization that would have Judaism as its preferred religion.
 
I am really surprised that in the 25 years of the Civilization franchise, Israel has never been a Civ. It would have been perfect for Civ V to have a Civilization that would have Judaism as its preferred religion.
Well, Israel as a united nation existed from 1050 BC to 1030 BBC and again from 1948 to the present. Their civilization lasted much longer, though. Also, their territory would be the smallest of all civilizations (on par with the Zulu ). I wouldn't be opposed to their presence, but I'd like to see other nations before them.
 
Druids. (Bonus on building Stonehenge.)

Druids?, really? come on!

Druids are part of Celtic culture (religion), and as far as I know Celts have been part of CIV series since CIV III.

You want original, historically sensible? Try some of the following:

Nubia, Italy, Hungary, Wends, Tibet, Khmer, Australia, Canada, Israel, Congo, Scotland, Etruscans, Minoans, Ashanti, Nabateans (the builders of Petra), Anasazi (creators of Pueblo), Apache, Cherokee, Switzerland, Phoenicians, Tatars, Seleucids...

And, FIRAXIS! PLEASE RE-INTRODUCE SUMERIA AND HATTI (HITTITES), both were there previously (Sumeria in 3 and 4 and Hittites in 3) but mysteriously disappeared in Civ 5, and in case of Sumeria, the birthplace of civilization, it's a really big omission.
 
Nubia, Italy, Hungary, Wends, Tibet, Khmer, Australia, Canada, Israel, Congo, Scotland, Etruscans, Minoans, Ashanti, Nabateans (the builders of Petra), Anasazi (creators of Pueblo), Apache, Cherokee, Switzerland, Phoenicians, Tatars, Seleucids...
Fixed that for you, country does not equal civilization. I thought it was bad enough to have Brazil, please don't add any more modern countries that are barely 100-200 years old.
 
The Vandals would make a good choice for a darkhorse civ: the archetypical destroyers (think 'vandalism')

Being Dutch i will mention the Frisians.
As wel as the Tocharians. They left a little bit of undiciferable script and hardly anything else. How dark can you get as a civilisation.

In general it is more fun, realistic and immersing to play a civ which already existed in antiquity, at least with an ancient start.
 
Fixed that for you, country does not equal civilization. I thought it was bad enough to have Brazil, please don't add any more modern countries that are barely 100-200 years old.

They probably wanted more South America civs besides just the Incans.
 
Fixed that for you, country does not equal civilization. I thought it was bad enough to have Brazil, please don't add any more modern countries that are barely 100-200 years old.

What about USA? Been in the game since the start, older, but how much older is America than Canada or Australia?

Canada and Australia are nothing more than British colonies, well, so was USA.

US is not an original civilization, just like Brazil, and if you go by your way of thinking, neither one of them belongs in the game!

You want unique civilizations based in part on their factual climate, eh?
Canada's cold climate nation, just like Norway or Finland that they could add. You're telling me that having, for example, the Inuit in the game instead of any of these countries makes more sense? What advancement to world culture, what wonders, what history as a nation do/did the Inuit present/create?
And this is Civilization we're talking about here, game based in large part on history, not some fantasy game.

Just what World Wonders, inventions, cultural advancements have such tribes as:
Zulu, Shoshone, or Huns ever accomplished? (besides militaristic ones)

The game's flat out wrong from the start by pitting half-barbaric tribes like Zulu against such truly great Civilizations like Rome or Greece.
In reality, the only way Zulu would be able to compete against Rome or Greece would be by military conquest.

Creators are plain wrong by letting such tribes compete on even terms with history's truly great civilizations, nations who build great wonders, invented most of the civilized advancements you get to research in the game, invented and built the buildings you build in your cities, the military units, invented the social policies you get to choose. Ever heard of a Shoshone built Amphitheatre? A Zulu great Wonder?

I'm not saying such tribes did not in any way contribute to Earth's History of Civilization, but their contribution is much inferior compared to that of Egypt or China, for example.
So the developers should really look into that.
Every nation/civilization included in the game should be far more unique from others, there should be a lot less GENERIC stuff, less generic units, buildings, wonders, less generic everything.


Truly great Civilizations should be able to hold (at least a slight) advantage in the game, as far as cultural development is concerned, and, if you want to play as the Huns, go right ahead, but: no Wonders available for you, no Amphitheatres or even Libraries. Your only chance: conquer them civilized ones: by fire and sword.

Being from Belgium, I'm sure you'd suggest Belgium as one of the nations to be added?
And I'd say why not?, except, isn't Belgium nothing more than Francophonized Netherlands?, where the Spanish ruled for many years in the past as well?

My other suggestions:
Macedonia (I don't mean the modern one (FYROM), I mean Macedonia of Phillip II and his son, Alexander the Great), Visigoths (or Goths altogether), Papal state (Vatican), Bulgaria, Ukraine (Kiyevan Rus'), Lydia, Harappan Civilization.
 
What about USA
The United States of America's influence on the world is undescribably large, its culture, architecture, military, arts, music, technology etcetera has accomplished great feats, more than many of the world's other nations. Simply, the USA is incredbly important, Australia and Canada are pretty much irrelevant compared to them. It's basically the exception to the rule.
Just what World Wonders, inventions, cultural advancements have such tribes as:
Zulu, Shoshone, or Huns ever accomplished? (besides militaristic ones)
Excellent point. Not much, I actually opposed the inclusion of the Zulu and The Huns back in the day they were announced.
 
What about USA? Been in the game since the start, older, but how much older is America than Canada or Australia?

Canada and Australia are nothing more than British colonies, well, so was USA.

US is not an original civilization, just like Brazil, and if you go by your way of thinking, neither one of them belongs in the game!

You want unique civilizations based in part on their factual climate, eh?
Canada's cold climate nation, just like Norway or Finland that they could add. You're telling me that having, for example, the Inuit in the game instead of any of these countries makes more sense? What advancement to world culture, what wonders, what history as a nation do/did the Inuit present/create?
And this is Civilization we're talking about here, game based in large part on history, not some fantasy game.

Just what World Wonders, inventions, cultural advancements have such tribes as:
Zulu, Shoshone, or Huns ever accomplished? (besides militaristic ones)

The game's flat out wrong from the start by pitting half-barbaric tribes like Zulu against such truly great Civilizations like Rome or Greece.
In reality, the only way Zulu would be able to compete against Rome or Greece would be by military conquest.

Creators are plain wrong by letting such tribes compete on even terms with history's truly great civilizations, nations who build great wonders, invented most of the civilized advancements you get to research in the game, invented and built the buildings you build in your cities, the military units, invented the social policies you get to choose. Ever heard of a Shoshone built Amphitheatre? A Zulu great Wonder?

I'm not saying such tribes did not in any way contribute to Earth's History of Civilization, but their contribution is much inferior compared to that of Egypt or China, for example.
So the developers should really look into that.
Every nation/civilization included in the game should be far more unique from others, there should be a lot less GENERIC stuff, less generic units, buildings, wonders, less generic everything.


Truly great Civilizations should be able to hold (at least a slight) advantage in the game, as far as cultural development is concerned, and, if you want to play as the Huns, go right ahead, but: no Wonders available for you, no Amphitheatres or even Libraries. Your only chance: conquer them civilized ones: by fire and sword.

Being from Belgium, I'm sure you'd suggest Belgium as one of the nations to be added?
And I'd say why not?, except, isn't Belgium nothing more than Francophonized Netherlands?, where the Spanish ruled for many years in the past as well?

My other suggestions:
Macedonia (I don't mean the modern one (FYROM), I mean Macedonia of Phillip II and his son, Alexander the Great), Visigoths (or Goths altogether), Papal state (Vatican), Bulgaria, Ukraine (Kiyevan Rus'), Lydia, Harappan Civilization.

Well, Civilization is an alternate history where you could have the Zulu build the pyramids and become culturally or scientifically dominant. They are built for war, but that does not mean that is the only thing they have to excel in. You could have the Zulu or Huns build empires and accomplish things that rival Greece and Rome, that is what the game is about.
 
Well, Israel as a united nation existed from 1050 BC to 1030 BBC and again from 1948 to the present. Their civilization lasted much longer, though. Also, their territory would be the smallest of all civilizations (on par with the Zulu ). I wouldn't be opposed to their presence, but I'd like to see other nations before them.

Israel was united for at least one hundred years I think. The Assyrians were included but the Assyrian Empire was short lived. Hebrew Civilization has had such a big impact on the world that I can't believe they haven't included it in a game yet.

Excellent point. Not much, I actually opposed the inclusion of the Zulu and The Huns back in the day they were announced.

The Huns being included as a "Civilization" doesn't make a whole lot of sense (though they are fun to play as). The Huns have only appeared one other time in the series to my knowledge, and that was as a tribe of barbarians in Civ III. If you count the barbarian city named "Hun" in Civ VI that makes II other times I guess.

The Zulu were included for nostalgia purposes. They've been in the game since Civ I and fans would be angry if they were left out. Civ VI was the first game to not include the Zulu in the vanilla game (included in the first expansion, however). Civ V included them in the last batch of civilizations. Maybe Civ VI won't include them at all, but I doubt it.
 
Top Bottom